784.02/3–950
Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Stuart W. Rockwell of the Office of African and Near Eastern Affairs
Subject: Israel–Jordan Negotiations, Status of Jerusalem, and General Palestine Problem.
| Participants: | Ambassador Elath |
| Mr. Keren, Counselor, Embassy of Israel | |
| NEA—Mr. Hare | |
| ANE—Mr. Rockwell |
Problem: The Israeli Government desired the United States Government to take certain action which it alleged would facilitate the reaching of an agreement between Israel and Jordan and a solution of the Jerusalem problem.
Action Required: None
Discussion: The following subjects were discussed during the conference with Messrs. Elath and Keren.
1. Message of Encouragement to King Abdullah.
Ambassador Elath said that his Government very much hoped that the United States Government would find it possible to send to King Abdullah a message of moral encouragement in the King’s present difficult situation arising out of the trouble he was having in persuading his Government to reach an agreement with Israel. He thought the King would be grateful for some indication that the United States was fully behind him in his fight.
Mr. Hare said that we had already heard of this desire on the part of the Israeli Government through messages from our Embassy in Tel Aviv, and that we had made certain recommendations to the Secretary. We did not know what decision the Secretary would take, but Mr. Hare doubted that it would be decided that the President should send a message to King Abdullah,1 as we understood Mr. Sharett had suggested. The President had, in fact, sent the King a message last December indirectly encouraging direct negotiations between Israel and Jordan. At times, Mr. Hare continued, it was disadvantageous to press a thing too hard. We were fully in agreement with the necessity of Israel and Jordan reaching an accord and would continue to offer [Page 790] the King encouragement to this end, as Mr. Elath knew we had in the past. Our understanding was that the King was not particularly disturbed by the present situation. Mr. Hare thought, however, that it might be possible for us to send some kind of new message of general encouragement.
Ambassador Elath volunteered the information that after the King had accepted the resignation of Prime Minister Tawfiq Pasha, and had requested Samir Pasha to form a new Government, Tawfiq Pasha learned that Samir was making good progress in establishing a new Government and thereupon offered to withdraw his resignation, agreeing at the same time to carry on the conversations with Israel. The King allegedly decided to give Tawfiq Pasha another chance, and reinstated him as Prime Minister.
2. United States Support of Jordan Guarantee Concerning Holy Places.
Ambassador Elath said that his Government, after much difficulty, had managed to persuade King Abdullah to agree to offer to the international community a guarantee of protection and free access for the Holy Places. The positions of Jordan and Israel on this matter were thus now the same. The Israeli Government hoped that the United States Government would be able to indicate to Abdullah its approval of his position, thereby strengthening him in this attitude.
Mr. Hare reiterated our position on the Jerusalem question, pointing out that the international community and particularly the Christian world was very much involved in the matter of Jerusalem, and that while an agreement between Jordan and Israel would be a good start, it would be incomplete unless this third party were also included. He recalled that we had felt that a plan along the lines of the PCC proposals represented a fair compromise between all the parties at interest, but that the United States had been defeated in the General Assembly and was now abiding by the Assembly’s decision and cooperating in the Trusteeship Council. We would thus not be in a position to take the move suggested by the Israeli Government, particularly since a régime for the Holy Places consisting solely of a guarantee by Jordan and Israel to the international community would not contain all of the elements we thought desirable in a Jerusalem solution, and since there was no indication of agreement by the majority of the international Christian community with the guarantee idea. Mr. Hare reminded Ambassador Elath and Mr. Keren that he had given them substantially the same response when, acting upon instructions, they had sought United States support for a discussion between the Trusteeship Council, Jordan and Israel in Geneva of a statute for Jerusalem limited to the Holy Places alone.
[Page 791]Ambassador Elath then inquired whether this meant that the United States would not approve an agreement on Jerusalem reached by Jordan and Israel alone. Israel desired the participation of the Vatican, but would make no concession concerning the parts of New Jerusalem not containing Holy Places. The Vatican was intransigently insisting upon international control of the whole area.
Mr. Hare did not comment directly on this question beyond reiterating that Jordan and Israel were not the only parties at interest and that the United States had to consider all the elements involved.
3. Jerusalem in the Trusteeship Council.
Mr. Keren said that the Israeli Government thought that approval by the Trusteeship Council of a Jerusalem statute drawn up according to the December 9 General Assembly instructions would have a very bad effect upon the Jordan-Israeli discussions. His Government hoped that the United States would take the lead in working against the approval of such a statute by the Council. Mr. Hare replied that we were in a rather awkward position in the Council, since we had expressed our original disapproval of the resolution under which the Council is now working. However, we had our obligations as a member of the United Nations, and were fulfilling them by cooperating constructively in the Council. “We would, however, take the Israeli Government’s desire in this connection into consideration.
4. Syrian Threat to Close Jordan Frontier.
Ambassador Elath said that his Government was very much disturbed by press accounts of a threat by the Syrian Government to close the frontier with Jordan if Jordan came to an agreement with Israel. This would be a blow to peace and stability in the Near East, he said, and his Government hoped that the United States would do what it could to prevent such a step. Mr. Hare said that we had heard this report and were asking our Missions in Damascus and the other Arab Capitals for comments.
5. Arms for Israel.
Mr. Hare then referred to the Israeli requests for assistance in obtaining defensive military equipment in this country. He wished to assure his visitors that this matter had not been pigeon-holed, but to inform them that the whole procedure was very complicated, involving as it did a number of agencies outside the Department. We were actively working on the question but it would be a little while before we had any definite information. Ambassador Elath expressed gratification for this information and said that his Government was extremely impatient to receive a definite answer.
6. Sale of Arab Refugee Property in Israel.
Mr. Hare then said that a story in the New York Times that morning stated that the Knesset had passed legislation enabling the Alien [Page 792] Property Custodian in Israel to sell abandoned Arab refugee property. We had not had official confirmation of this, but he wished to point out informally that steps such as this were just the kind that muddied, if not poisoned, the atmosphere. Mr. Hare thought it particularly unfortunate that such a move should have been taken at this time, if the newspaper report was true. He reminded Ambassador Elath that about a year ago we had cautioned Israel2 concerning the harmful effects which the sale of Arab refugee property would have, insofar as the possibility of arriving at agreements between Israel and the Arab states was concerned. This was not an official representation on the matter, but merely an observation and a reminder. Ambassador Elath said that he had not received official confirmation of the press report but would convey Mr. Hare’s comments to Tel Aviv.3
- For the text of the message, dated December 30, 1949, see Foreign Relations, 1949, vol. vi, p. 1564.↩
- See telegram 98, February 17, 1949, to Tel Aviv, Foreign Relations, 1949, vol. vi, p. 754.↩
- The substance of the discussion recorded under item 6 was sent to Tel Aviv on March 10 in telegram 119, with the instruction to Ambassador McDonald to discuss the matter with Israeli officials (684.85/3–1050). The Embassy in Tel Aviv, on April 19, commented that “Whether or not Mr. Hare’s comments have deterred the Government of Israel in any degree from exercising the privilege granted by this legislation cannot be conjectured, but there has not as yet been an instance where the Custodian has disposed of real property by sale. In all probability, the necessity of reorganizing the Office of the Custodian and establishing the State Development Authority (the latter is the agency empowered under the Absentees’ Property Act to purchase real property from the Custodian) has been primarily responsible for the delay in making use of the new law. There are indications, however, that sales of absentee property will be limited, at least initially, to those made with one of the following ends in view: 1) the improvement of the public road system, 2) the construction of Government-sponsored housing projects, and 3) the restoration of abandoned orange groves.” (Despatch 243, 784A.00/4–1950)↩